Investigating gender stereotypes in nursing/midwifery and engineering students in Ireland

Anna V. Chatzi , Kyriakos I. Kourousis
{"title":"Investigating gender stereotypes in nursing/midwifery and engineering students in Ireland","authors":"Anna V. Chatzi ,&nbsp;Kyriakos I. Kourousis","doi":"10.1016/j.ijedro.2024.100367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Stereotypical behaviour in higher education has been linked with inequality with relevant negative output. This project's aim is to replicate the design of a previous study by expanding further into exploring the gender stereotypes’ relationships for two traditionally gendered polarised areas of study: Engineering and Nursing/Midwifery and assessing participants’ earlier experiences in their secondary education. Survey participants were Engineering and Nursing/Midwifery students (N = 161) of a university in Ireland. Results came positive for stereotypical biases in favour to men in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), and specifically for Mathematics. Stereotypes emerged stronger among the female participants. While comparing the two genders within each of the two study areas, significant differences emerge among the female Nursing/Midwifery and female Engineering participants. Female Engineering participants appear with stronger preference, attitude and importance towards STEM than their Nursing/Midwifery counterparts. Nevertheless, Mathematics is an indicator subject for success in higher education and the need to strengthen critical thinking, evidenced based practice and quality of quantitative research in female dominated areas such as Nursing/Midwifery has been recognised. In addition to identified stereotypes, differences in respondents’ views/elements of their interaction with STEM were associated with the type of secondary school they attended. Further research is recommended on traits that could contribute to the formation of gender biased stereotypes in single and mixed gender education systems with an aim to reverse them.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73445,"journal":{"name":"International journal of educational research open","volume":"7 ","pages":"Article 100367"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666374024000499/pdfft?md5=88e13451b5b22b9d31f4339bd5d7a767&pid=1-s2.0-S2666374024000499-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of educational research open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666374024000499","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Stereotypical behaviour in higher education has been linked with inequality with relevant negative output. This project's aim is to replicate the design of a previous study by expanding further into exploring the gender stereotypes’ relationships for two traditionally gendered polarised areas of study: Engineering and Nursing/Midwifery and assessing participants’ earlier experiences in their secondary education. Survey participants were Engineering and Nursing/Midwifery students (N = 161) of a university in Ireland. Results came positive for stereotypical biases in favour to men in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), and specifically for Mathematics. Stereotypes emerged stronger among the female participants. While comparing the two genders within each of the two study areas, significant differences emerge among the female Nursing/Midwifery and female Engineering participants. Female Engineering participants appear with stronger preference, attitude and importance towards STEM than their Nursing/Midwifery counterparts. Nevertheless, Mathematics is an indicator subject for success in higher education and the need to strengthen critical thinking, evidenced based practice and quality of quantitative research in female dominated areas such as Nursing/Midwifery has been recognised. In addition to identified stereotypes, differences in respondents’ views/elements of their interaction with STEM were associated with the type of secondary school they attended. Further research is recommended on traits that could contribute to the formation of gender biased stereotypes in single and mixed gender education systems with an aim to reverse them.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
调查爱尔兰护理/助产和工程专业学生的性别陈规定型观念
高等教育中的陈规定型行为与不平等有关,并产生了相关的负面影响。本项目旨在复制之前的研究设计,进一步探索两个传统上性别两极分化的学习领域的性别陈规定型观念关系:工程学和护理学/助产学,并评估参与者在中学教育阶段的早期经历。调查对象为爱尔兰一所大学的工程学和护理学/助产学专业的学生(N = 161)。调查结果显示,在科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)领域,尤其是数学领域,存在有利于男性的陈规定型偏见。女性参与者中的陈规定型观念更为强烈。在对两个研究领域内的两性进行比较时,护理/助产专业的女性参与者和工程专业的女性参与者之间出现了显著差异。与护理/助产专业的女性学员相比,工程学专业的女性学员对 STEM 的偏好、态度和重视程度更高。然而,数学是高等教育成功的指标性科目,在护理/助产等女性占主导地位的领域,加强批判性思维、循证实践和定量研究质量的必要性已得到认可。除了已确定的陈规定型观念外,受访者与 STEM 互动的观点/要素差异还与他们就读的中学类型有关。建议进一步研究在单一性别和混合性别教育体系中可能导致性别偏见定型观念形成的特质,以扭转这些观念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
69 days
期刊最新文献
Resilience in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping literature review with implications for evidence-informed policymaking Effectiveness of a locally developed cultural responsiveness tool for Australian teachers. Pre-service english teachers’ perceptions of language assessment in a colombian language teacher education program Promoting a restorative culture in schools: Insights from school leaders Emotional exhaustion faced by Italian female teaching staff during COVID-19 pandemic: A sequential mediation model applying coping strategies, self-efficacy for online teaching, and technostress
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1